StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Well, just for the record; that map was supposed to be where they were based, and not necessarily where they actually were. But I figured that was accounted for anyway.

Unrelated but somewhat related notes:

- Ryan I totally forgot and don't know if you ever changed anything but since we retro'd pretty much every Atlantic naval operation back to scratch then it also includes when I swung over to Maracaibo and sunk those 4 Monitors so you should still have them. I think the only naval operations that didn't get retro'd were in the Pacific.

- RE: IC Thread. Both posts that have gone up are intended to be wildly optimistic/pessimistic reporting from the various partisan papers in Mexico that don't have anyone actually reporting from the front lines (and they couldn't file reports anyway, not timely at least). The actual results, as related the the rolls posted here. Have total Mexican repulse on my right, general success (1st or 2nd line of trenches) in the center, and smashing success on the left modified by a rapid Colombian counter-attack. That counter-attack has devolved in to a stalemate (at least for D+11) as the forces are relatively closely matched.

So as a brief overview: Colombians trash my right, some success in the center and general success on the left. Tomorrow (D+12) Ryan will crush my blocking force in Yaviza and more attacks will come in the main battle outside Ciudad de Panama.

Uh? Only the D10 landings were retconned, your attack on the Maracaibo monitors was not.

Got my IC post in, we're readying up a meeting place in Havana. If the delegates are on their best behaivor, we'll even supply them with some cigars.

Will we be ringing in the new year with a major war on the Indian Subcontinent? MAYBE!

Lonestar wrote:Will we be ringing in the new year with a major war on the Indian Subcontinent? MAYBE!

That dastardly Makarov!

I swear to god, Lonestar, if you make it so Afghanistan can actually advance into Shepistan, I'll... Do something. I'm not quite sure what yet.

And to think that it happens just as a large Shepistani expeditionary force has left the country...

Norseman wrote:And to think that it happens just as a large Shepistani expeditionary force has left the country...

Less than 50,000 troops have actually left the country(and there are more Dominionite troops out of the country than Shepistani troops). In any event I need to coordinate heavily with Shep as to what happens next.

Okay, this is getting stupid now. Wilkins is pretending that we have troops crammed into the combat area at a density four times that of Cuidad de Panama.

Either they're going to have trouble maneuvering or his deployment to the front is limited by his numbers; which means that our numbers are equal and his assertion that he has a 3:1 advantage for instant win no longer applies.

Also, I was unaware that this region was apparently only 20% less built up than Miami.

EDIT: the discussion appears to go something like this (and this is an extreme paraphrase, btw)

"We have a ridiculous number of troops on the front according to this map. There are cities with a lower population density than this. My greater artillery should be having a field day."
"Not all the troops are right at the front."
"Ah, good. Then he has as many as I do and his numerical advantage is negated."
"No he outnumbers you 3:1."
"So he has an incredibly dense deployment, because I'm already deploying at the maximum feasible density (whatever that would be)--and my artillery becomes very much more effective."
"But not all his troops are at the front."
"So then he matches me numerically per engagement and my entrenched positions give me the advantage."
"Except that he outnumbers you 3:1 so your advantage is negated."

etc. etc. etc.

So which is it, you smarmy assholes? Outnumbering and death by entrenched artillery, or equal numbers per engagement with my forces gaining the advantage by being entrenched?

I will get my post tommmorow. I will have time.

You remember the battle I was talking to you about the other night? Battle of Messines before 3rd Ypres/Passchendaele? That was 12 Divisions with 9 on line and 3 in close reserve (that is they advanced but were not the first wave) on a front of less than 6 miles. This works out to 1.333333etc Div/mile on the front and 2Div/mile overall. The front of advance on the first day of primary attacks (D+11) involved 6 Corps/18 Div on a Front of 10 Miles or 1.8 Div/mile (1.2/mile if I employed the same tactic of 2 up 1 back). The second day of attacks (D+12) Involved 4 Corps and 2 Division sized formations for a total of 14 Divisions on a front of about 6 miles or just slightly over the density at Messines.

In other words NO this is not overly dense troops concentrations

To further reiterate what I put to you last night those troops were supported by roughly 2,200 arty pieces and likely opposed by 600-700 pieces, a fire density on either part which is nowhere near (by an order of magnitude) what is occurring here. In other words once again I am pressing with the rule of thumb 3-1 advantage while your counter-battery density is an order of magnitude under what was seen on the Western Front. Moreover by D+11 you would be in secondary positions and likely beginning to experience your first shortage of shells due to chronic underestimation and the fact that half of your available supply line has been cut.

I've mentioned on AIM but I'll put it here, I expect that my arty (expect for units so far un-engaged) will no longer have sufficient stocks on hand for supporting D+13 attacks and that is with an uninterrupted supply line on my part.

CmdrWilkens wrote:You remember the battle I was talking to you about the other night? Battle of Messines before 3rd Ypres/Passchendaele? That was 12 Divisions with 9 on line and 3 in close reserve (that is they advanced but were not the first wave) on a front of less than 6 miles. This works out to 1.333333etc Div/mile on the front and 2Div/mile overall. The front of advance on the first day of primary attacks (D+11) involved 6 Corps/18 Div on a Front of 10 Miles or 1.8 Div/mile (1.2/mile if I employed the same tactic of 2 up 1 back). The second day of attacks (D+12) Involved 4 Corps and 2 Division sized formations for a total of 14 Divisions on a front of about 6 miles or just slightly over the density at Messines.

In other words NO this is not overly dense troops concentrations

Except that I'm not talking about the line any more. I'm talking about the actual area occupied by the troops. The density of which must be in excess of 8000 troops per square kilometer, or else you lose the immediately useful effects of your numerical advantage for each engagement.

Choose, please.

To further reiterate what I put to you last night those troops were supported by roughly 2,200 arty pieces and likely opposed by 600-700 pieces, a fire density on either part which is nowhere near (by an order of magnitude) what is occurring here. In other words once again I am pressing with the rule of thumb 3-1 advantage

You know what, Wilkins? I don't give a shit about your goddamned rule of thumb. I've used every fucking force multiplier at my disposal and you want to pretend that they all count for shit because you reached some magic ratio? Well fuck you and the horse you rode in on.

Moreover by D+11 you would be in secondary positions and likely beginning to experience your first shortage of shells due to chronic underestimation and the fact that half of your available supply line has been cut.

Nope. I get supplies from local stocks. You have to ship them in, so you're at a disadvantage.

You know I had a nice detailed response but I'm just gonna shelve it. If you have a complaint do what Rogue said and take it to the Mods. I know you are pissed I invaded but quite whining and play. If you think I can't do something then issue a formal complaint to the mods otherwise stop using this thread as your personal public bitching session. I will respond to any request for information issued by the mods but otherwise until I hear a declaration contrary I will proceed as I have stated I will.

CmdrWilkens wrote:I know you are pissed I invaded

Oh come on now. Don't think me so shallow as to be pissed that you merely made a move. Your political maneuvering was quite beautifully done. You'll notice I'm not complaining about that, because everything you did there makes perfect sense.

No, its merely how... well, nothing militarily works as I expected it to and your stuff does pretty well exactly what you want it to do. We aren't even playing the same game. It's as if I started up playing Total Annihilation, and then you invited me to a match, which I joined, and then suddenly we're playing a completely different game that I don't even have installed on my computer, where I have no idea what the fuck I'm doing.

So here I am with an entire military (yeah they didn't like the rest of it, either, guess I'll just go with cookie-cutter boring shit next time ) that's designed to lose even though 1. that makes no fucking sense and 2. that's not the sort of country I signed up to play.

So now we're playing dirty, eh? Fair enough. It'll give me an excuse to rapidly modernize Afghanistan's gas defences. Time to manufacture those old cloth pads they started using as soon as the gas started!

Also - release the manspiders.

Alright, first of two massive storyposts posted. Expect the next one tomorrow or sunday.

Also, just posted something I forgot - there will be a fleet review in order to commemorate Wilhelm's ascension to the throne. If you want to participate or show the flag, just post in this thread or send me a PM.

Thanas wrote:Also, just posted something I forgot - there will be a fleet review in order to commemorate Wilhelm's ascension to the throne. If you want to participate or show the flag, just post in this thread or send me a PM.

Mongolia would love to! If we had ships.

Can we send a nice letter, though? I figure we would have some sort of formality, though, due to relatively large numbers of German investors and emigrants in Mongolia, as well as sending many Mongolian officers and so forth to German universities. I doubt those are really official state business, but Mongolia in general has warm feelings for Germany, even if they aren't really reciprocated.

Argh, forgot about those countries, sorry. The Ambassador certainly can attend in that matter, and if Mongolia wants to it can send two or three planes for the air parade that will fly over the assembled ships.

Gah! I'm six months behind! And I haven't posted yet! But I will, I hope.

EDIT: And Brazil might appear in that naval review, *IF* the issue with Mexico is resolved before then... :-/

Thanas wrote:Also, just posted something I forgot - there will be a fleet review in order to commemorate Wilhelm's ascension to the throne. If you want to participate or show the flag, just post in this thread or send me a PM.

Where is this fleet review? I'd love to send the Salah ad-Din the Conqueror, but actually getting there is bound to be the longest naval voyage in the history of the Sultanate's navy...

Thanas, I assume you mean Feb. 1926?

Norseman wrote:Gah! I'm six months behind! And I haven't posted yet! But I will, I hope.

EDIT: And Brazil might appear in that naval review, *IF* the issue with Mexico is resolved before then... :-/

Considering that the war began on 1 August 1925 and the US is pushing for a ceasefire sometime on or about August 15th I think any actions in Q4 1925 or Q1 1926 will remain unaffected.

Thanas wrote:Also, just posted something I forgot - there will be a fleet review in order to commemorate Wilhelm's ascension to the throne. If you want to participate or show the flag, just post in this thread or send me a PM.

Assuming I've been able to run my fleet through a good maintenance stand-down after having been on blockade duty for a month or so in August I'd like to send some of my Virtuoso(Virtue)-class Battlecruisers to the review.

Unfortunately, the Afghanis are too busy to attend and don't have a navy to send anyway.